Quran is free of errors

[themadhair]

Response: Now after failing to provide proof that mountains do not prevent the earth from shaking, you try to credit proof with an explaination.

Unless you can find fault with my explanation, an explanation which reflects the current understanding of earthquakes and mountain formation, then I will assume that you accept the science within it as valid.

You now have to explain why the fact that mountains are formed by the same phenomenom that leads to earthquakes is proof that mountains do not prevent the earth from shaking.

The process that continues to drive mountains up, specifically plate collision, also continues to generate earthquakes. This is evident from the understating I presented from a primary school level textbook on the subject. That ongoing plate collision continues to both drive up mountains, while simultaneously generating earthquake activity, show the ineffectual nature of mountains for the purpose of preventing earthquakes.

From your own admission, there is no science book on the face of the earth or website that specifically and directly says that mountains do not prevent the earth from shaking.

Just as you will not find the claim that Alpha Centurai does not prevent cancer. Textbooks deal with things that happen, not with listing things that do not happen for the benefit of koranic scientists.

Response: I've explained on numerous occasions that I am on this site through my blackberry phone so my ability to provide links is limited.

I am utterly tired of you holding myself and others to a standard of proof that you yourself will not meet. It is a double standard and I am calling you on it.

However, I've always agreed and accepted the links in which others have provided and showed from their own link how mountains do prevent the earth from shaking.

I have not seen any textbook, peer-reviewed paper or academic geology website that has any material whatsoever that substantiates this claim. The material that I, and others, have presented to you, and gone to great lengths to explain that material and its relevance to the topic for you, rubbishes your claim.

When I think of the time and effort that myself, and others, have spent producing this material I think it completely unreasonable that you yourself cannot even produce even a tenth of such work. All you are doing is demonstrating your incapacity for understanding the mechanics of plate tectonics as it relates to both earthquakes and mountain formation. This incapacity is something I find puzzling given that, as evidenced by the primary school level textbook I referenced, that primary school children can grasp these concepts.

Point 1.The qur'an says that mountains prevent the earth from shaking with us. This is not to say that it prevents earthquakes from happening. There is a difference. …
Point 3. The arabic word for "earthquake" is "zilzal" or "zalzala" and in those verses these words are not there. This is what I mean when I say that the verse does not say earthquake. The arabic word is "tamida" which means to shake or swing.

An earthquake is definitionally the earth shaking. An earthquake is defined to happen when the earth shakes. When the earth shakes the word used to describe that phenomenon is ‘earthquake’.

Fatihah, you simply cannot claim that earthquakes are separate from the earth shaking given that earthquake is defined as being an occurrence of the earth shaking.

Point 2. We need to understand the way the word "prevent" and "earthquake" can be used. If I were to say to you that doctors use medicine to prevent a patient from being ill, it doesn't mean that the prevention is permanent. If I had a cold and let's say that I had a cup of tea which healed me from that cold, that cup of tea did "prevent" me from continuing to be ill, but it does not "prevent" me from ever having a cold again. As you can see, it's the same word, but it's meaning is not exactly the same depending on it's context.

This analogy doesn’t hold. In your analogy the disease is prevented while the medicine is in effect. In plate tectonics earthquakes are in effect from the very moment of mountain formation – there is never a period where the mountains are in effect in a manner to dissuade the occurrence of earthquakes.

With all of this said, let's now look and examine the theory of plate tectonics together from any reliable site of your choosing and we will come to learn together that mountains do prevent the earth from shaking.

Fatihah, until you either refute the understanding of plate tectonics I, and others, have presented or produce relevant material from a reliable source that evidences your claim of mountains preventing earthquakes then I have no intention of seeking out additional sources. I’m calling you out for holding a ridiculous double standard and challenge you to produce a geology textbook, peer-review paper or a university’s geology department website that backs your claim that mountains prevent the earth from shaking. Time for you to do some legwork.

 

[YmirGF]

if there's a scientific community who has isuue with the argument, then it will be adressed to them. But as you can see, there is none.

True. The scientific community does not usually address drivel promulgated by religious fanatics.

 

[Fatihah]

The process that continues to drive mountains up, specifically plate collision, also continues to generate earthquakes. This is evident from the understating I presented from a primary school level textbook on the subject. That ongoing plate collision continues to both drive up mountains, while simultaneously generating earthquake activity, show the ineffectual nature of mountains for the purpose of preventing earthquakes.

Response: Exactly. But the point is this,"is the earth shaking you as we speak"? No! Therefore there comes a point in which the shakes of the earthquake that cause us to move eventually stop. I'm asking the simple question, "what prevented the quakes from contuining?"

 

[Fatihah]

True. The scientific community does not usually address drivel promulgated by religious fanatics.

Response: No they don't. Instead, they convert to islam.

 

[YmirGF]

Response: No they don't. Instead, they convert to islam.

I do LOVE the Muslim sense of humour, lol. :foryou:

 

[The Voice of Reason]

You know, for people that honestly think that their **** doesn't stink, you'd think that by now, you would have figured out how to capitalize words (eselam) and how to use the "quote" feature (Fatihah).

If either of you want to show us how brilliant you are, you could start with demonstrating a basic knowledge of the keyboard, and the basics of this site.

When you've mastered those two issues, we'll move on to colors and shapes - just like the little kids in pre-school do.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

As for adressing my argument to a scientific community, if there's a scientific community who has isuue with the argument, then it will be adressed to them. But as you can see, there is none.

So, let me get this straight.

You have spent the last three weeks telling us how modern science has confirmed the inerrancy of your sacred text, but when asked to have your claims verified by peer review ... well ... all of a sudden, there is no science community.

Once again, demonstrating that there simply is no "bottom" for you two.

 

[themadhair]

Response: Exactly. But the point is this,"is the earth shaking you as we speak"? No!

Because I am not in a region experiencing an earthquake….?

Therefore there comes a point in which the shakes of the earthquake that cause us to move eventually stop. I'm asking the simple question, "what prevented the quakes from contuining?"

The earth itself Fatihah. You see mass, which is composed of matter or ‘stuff’, has an intrinsic property called inertia which is resistance to movement. The earth, in case you missed it Fatihah, has rather a lot of mass and thus has a lot of inertia and thus is very resistant to movement. It is the earth itself that absorbs the energy released from earthquakes.

Moreover this claim of yours, aside from being another display of the intellectual majesty of koranic science, doesn’t hold up given that earthquakes happen irrespective of mountain presence when plates are in contact.

The world itself has presented us with empirical evidence on this. Of the various types of plate interactions mountains only occur at plate collision – yet the magnitude and frequency of earthquakes is fairly consistent along plate boundaries of all type of plate interactions.

And no – I don’t intend to ferret out links for the above since it would only encourage you to continue demanding a double standard.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Not subtle enough. Nice idea, not the best execution.

Definitionaly we are animals so calling it a 'scientific fact' doesn't make sense. Admittedly, being Hindu, you would be receptive to the idea that animals and humans are very alike. The reason why I am take the view of animals and humans being similar is because I don't see what is so special about humanity.

I am not looking at it from a mental view, but more physical. We have too much in common with animals and their biology to NOT be animals. There is a plant cell and an animal cell, you do not see the human cell. This shows we are not seperate from the animal kingdom. We have purely reached a level of consciousness that is much higher than animals.

Me being a Hindu has nothing to do with this. Although, we do look at humans and animals as very close beings.

 

[darkendless]

So, let me get this straight.

You have spent the last three weeks telling us how modern science has confirmed the inerrancy of your sacred text, but when asked to have your claims verified by peer review ... well ... all of a sudden, there is no science community.

Once again, demonstrating that there simply is no "bottom" for you two.

I think there's enough combined knowledge on RF to pose a "scientific community." Between us all we cover most forms of science no hassle. Auto and Paintedwolf are fantastic when it comes to ToE and biology. The rest of us know enough about science to cover the rest.
Then again, people who are silly enough to convince themselves that scripture is even remotely scientific should have no trouble ignoring common sense and sound reasoning.

 

[gnostic]

Definitionaly we are animals so calling it a 'scientific fact' doesn't make sense. Admittedly, being Hindu, you would be receptive to the idea that animals and humans are very alike. The reason why I am take the view of animals and humans being similar is because I don't see what is so special about humanity.

I am not looking at it from a mental view, but more physical. We have too much in common with animals and their biology to NOT be animals. There is a plant cell and an animal cell, you do not see the human cell. This shows we are not seperate from the animal kingdom. We have purely reached a level of consciousness that is much higher than animals.

I'd have to agree with Don.

Leaving aside some of the bizarre worm-like creature, and some exception, most animals have eyes, ears, teeth, heart, stomach, liver, kidney, blood, bones, skin, hairs, etc. We are different from animals, but some of our physical organs functioned in similar fashion to us humans. So we are animals too. We are simply different species, or some other category I don't know about.

We even have the same habits. We eat, drink, sleep, reproduce, pee, and do other unmentionable things, as do many animals.

 

[Gharib]

You know, for people that honestly think that their **** doesn't stink, you'd think that by now, you would have figured out how to capitalize words (eselam) and how to use the "quote" feature (Fatihah).

If either of you want to show us how brilliant you are, you could start with demonstrating a basic knowledge of the keyboard, and the basics of this site.

When you've mastered those two issues, we'll move on to colors and shapes - just like the little kids in pre-school do.

a funny guy ey.

you have a problem with me not capitalising words rEaSoN?

since when did you become a perfect freak?
(note a "perfect freak" is someone who wants everything perfect, just incase you don't know)

you know you can be funny at times, but thats probably because it's unintentional.

you should do it more often.

 

[Gharib]

I think there's enough combined knowledge on RF to pose a "scientific community." Between us all we cover most forms of science no hassle. Auto and Paintedwolf are fantastic when it comes to ToE and biology. The rest of us know enough about science to cover the rest.
Then again, people who are silly enough to convince themselves that scripture is even remotely scientific should have no trouble ignoring common sense and sound reasoning.

we can't all be smart like you darkendless. can we?

 

[McBell]

we can't all be smart like you darkendless. can we?

Not when you are wallowing in self imposed ignorance.

 

[Fatihah]

You know, for people that honestly think that their **** doesn't stink, you'd think that by now, you would have figured out how to capitalize words (eselam) and how to use the "quote" feature (Fatihah).

If either of you want to show us how brilliant you are, you could start with demonstrating a basic knowledge of the keyboard, and the basics of this site.

When you've mastered those two issues, we'll move on to colors and shapes - just like the little kids in pre-school do.

Response: And if you want to show how brilliant you are, you should be able to post comments relative to the subject, because anything otherwise will stand as evidence of you diverting the attention from the subject due to the fact that your logic to the subject is lacking. So in an effort to hide your misfortune, you post comments with the intent to direction our attention from the obvious.

 

[McBell]

Response: And if you want to show how brilliant you are, you should be able to post comments relative to the subject, because anything otherwise will stand as evidence of you diverting the attention from the subject due to the fact that your logic to the subject is lacking. So in an effort to hide your misfortune, you post comments with the intent to direction our attention from the obvious.

"diverting the attention from the subject due to the fact that your logic to the subject is lacking"
​

Holy Kettle Calling the Pot Black, Batman!!

 

[Fatihah]

So, let me get this straight.

You have spent the last three weeks telling us how modern science has confirmed the inerrancy of your sacred text, but when asked to have your claims verified by peer review ... well ... all of a sudden, there is no science community.

Once again, demonstrating that there simply is no "bottom" for you two.

Response: I never said that there was no scientific community. So your comment is quite pointless.

 

[Fatihah]

The earth itself Fatihah. You see mass, which is composed of matter or ‘stuff’, has an intrinsic property called inertia which is resistance to movement. The earth, in case you missed it Fatihah, has rather a lot of mass and thus has a lot of inertia and thus is very resistant to movement. It is the earth itself that absorbs the energy released from earthquakes.

Response: First of all, what is inertia? According to your definition, it is matter that is resistant to movement. This is absolutely wrong. Your statement concerning inertia ia evidence enough that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Absolute none. Secondly, how does the earth absorb energy? Lastly, the earth has inertia which is resistant to movement, than how was the earth able to move in the first place? You have a lot of explaining to do.

 

[Fatihah]

"diverting the attention from the subject due to the fact that your logic to the subject is lacking"
​

Holy Kettle Calling the Pot Black, Batman!!

Response: I'm reading a statement. Where's the proof?

 

[Gharib]

Not when you are wallowing in self imposed ignorance.

grow up mestemia.